very hard. >> >> and we appreciate your candor and professionalism. >> 34 is to comply with the order of determination. >> do we need to discuss that? >> procedurally what would be the effect if we don't act on it, does it because it came from the sunshine task force, become effective or whatever the right term is? >> i think so. >> i think that procedurally we don't act on it then you would not have to determined that respondent has met his burden. so we do need to. >> yes. >> even the last motion it seems like we have to follow. and i move that the respondent has met the burden of establishing that there was no

violation of 67.34 for failure to comply... >> failure to comply with the sotfs april 5, 2012 order. >> i second it. >> discussion? >> all in favor? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> just note for the record there is no public here for comment. >> thank you. >> okay. >> the next addenda item. >> i believe that is the contributor guide. >> yeah. >> so, just as an fyi, the pending legislation that is being worked on by president chiu and the board and the city attorney, among the proposals

that we will be sending forward soon is a requirement that the ethics commission publish a contributor guide in addition to all of the guides that we have, something that we have not done in the past. it just so happens that we already had one in the works. so we bring to you a proposed draft of that, we think that it is fairly comprehensive. and the only other thing that i want to say it has a few minute of last minute typos that we want to correct before the commission considers adopting this document. >> okay. >> let's see the first typo is right at the very beginning. where in the introduction, there is just a space between the and the end of this page. so it is just a movement.

>> second typo is page 4. first line, yes, as long as the contribution is under 100,000 dollars. and the third typo, is on page 5, make a contribution, and the word contribution was spelled incorrectly. >> and the other thing that i wanted to say was generally speaking the commission approves these guides initially. but as legislation and regulation pass that it is just the staff that modifies them going forward.

>> made available. >> i am clearly looking through my non-profit eyes, and i was wondering for corporations i am on page 7 and for those who function with the corporation and they know that they are a corporation and interestingly enough thatvy learned particularly to the work that i have been doing with the human services network is that non-profits really need an ongoing amount of education around these types of things. and so i am wondering if we

could put the word may a corporation or non-profit, make a campaign contribution which then you will answer very clearly, corporations where they are profit or not. and because i think that it is non-profits see it in bold, they will be more willing to read it which then obviously more clearly allows them to just be educated. and so i guess that the question that i have are all non-profits corporations? >> they are. but they don't know it. and that is and that is what i am trying to say, and i think that they may not treat themselves as that. and a lot are grass roots are really just believing that i am not a corporation i am just a well meaning group of people that are trying to do good in the world. >> i might suggest that it be worded may a for profit or a non-profit corporation, would that be clear enough?

>> may a for profit or a non-profit corporation make a campaign contribution? >> even better. >> it will track the language closer. >> anything else that you want to add. >> i would like to commend the staff and i think that it is clear and it is going to be helpful. two comments, one i think that the language saying this is not the law and it needs to be a little strong and her it needs to refer to the specific code whether it is the cng code or whatever it is. to send the people there hey you got to look at the code this is not the law. >> and i think that it also would be helpful if possible to

put citations for the boxes and i don't know if that makes it too busy or we are going to refer to the code and it will be quite helpful to actually refer to it in each box so that if they want to know what the law says for each box that they can... >> right. >> unless you all think that is too much work or over kill? >> it was too much work. >> we love hearing that. >> the fact that we are practicing what we just talked about. >> and nicely done. >> i think that it is a very readable. and very helpful. >> any other notes on the contributor's guide? >> so when will the final guide be ready? >> it will be ready, if the commission adopts it, it will be ready by tomorrow and should

be posted on our website some time, the problem is that steven our tech guy is on vacation. and he is out training and so he could post it. >> so do we want to... >> the suggestions. >> okay. >> make a motion to adopt it with the suggestions that have been made? >> yes. >> i move that we adopt the contributor's guide with these changes that were suggested in the discussion. >> second. >> any further discussions? >> all in favor? >> we got to ask for public comment public comment? >> okay. >> all right. all in favor? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> good. we have had adopted the contributor's guide and i think that it is a very good one. >> okay. >> and again, with the minutes, we have a few last minute typo

corrections. >> yes. on page 1, where we say the fifth commission member was vacant, it should say the 5th commission seat was vacant. push on page 2, in the motion it is actually the historic preservation commission not the committee. >> i notice that mr. martinez name is misspelled and it is missing a t. >> you are right, you are absolutely right. >> on page 4, in question 7, i guess that there is an under score that does not belong there between that and its.

and then on page 5, the fourth paragraph, actually what happened was david pilpal a member of the public actually alerted us that the filers identified in draft regulations 3.1-500-1, 3.1500-2, and 3.1-500-3 were already in the other draft regulations. so, my suggestion is that we change the first sentence to read, after david pilpal alerted them that... identified in those drafts that regulations after on the third line, after 3.1-103-3, put a comma there and the commission agreed, and accordingly, blah,

blah, blah. >> and... >> the action is taken because david made the suggestion that the commission found reasonable. >> yes. >> and so we just wanted to throw the credit his way. >> thank you. >> and then on page 7, in the paragraph under the motion the second line the word should be governmental conduct code. and that is all that i found. >> where is that? >> the last one was on page 6. >> after the moegts. >> i think that i said 7, on the second line, the san francisco campaign and governmental conduct code not

conduce code. >> >> i move that we approve the minutes as edited. >> second. >> public comment? >> all in favor? >> aye. >> aye. >> the minutes stand approved. >> okay. >> and do you have a report? >> yeah, a few quick highlights. and item number for you and notice that the revenues for the year, exceeded what we are anticipating. which is good. and the number 7, the statements of economic interest, we are pursuing on filers, the one thing that i will point out is right now we are at 17 non-filers for seis which is you know, obviously we are concerned that we want 100 percent, but, normally, we have

between 50 and 70 non-file and hers so we are doing better this year than we are in the past and i will point that out and number eight, i just want you to know that we have a productive meeting with the ethics committee in san diego and los angeles in sacramento and we shared a lot of ideas and rereinvigorated our working relationship. and in case you have not seen, the chair person in ravel was not nominated by president obama to the federal election commission yesterday. and obviously the senate confirmation hearings take time, but this is an appointment that was greeted with a great deal of enthusiasm. both here in california and in washington. >> fantastic. >> if she gets confirmed she will be moving on. >> i would like to mention that i am glad that you flagged

number 8. i recall that as the times are certain of budget stringency, the staff has not been able to participate in the national activities of ethics organizations so one is that i am glad that we have that california exchange. but also it makes me want to ask, whether or not we are able to do that kind of national professional participation or whether we use stringency is effecting that. >> even though it is improving that was something that was not timely to ask for. i think that maybe next year, the thing that educated my thinking about this too is just this convention was in canada which might add to the expense and so on. although, that is a goal that we would have for the future

years. and that was again, we always set aside a night for the california commission to get together and update and talk and communicate. and again, we do communicate well already. but this is always, it is always good to sit down with the faces and the names and not just be on the phone and be together and that is always valuable and of course, mable and i and other folks were members of panels and so we made presentations of our own.

>> we will fill the position of our education out reach person, coordinator. and hopefully as soon as possible. in fact, we would be doing that now, except that the human resources requires us to hire from a set pool that they established. and there is not one. >> so we can't hire until there is a pool. and they are is supposed to be one in the coming months. i believe that if we are careful, we will also be able to fund the vacant investigator position that has been vacant for years and i anticipate that this is enough to do that. the caviot is that we got through the budget hearing of the board and the budget has not been adopted yet. next week after the board is done with whatever cuts and everything else that they do, then they do add backs and everything else and the final negotiations with the mayor's office. and i am in constant touch with

the board and with the mayor's office about this. so, you know try to keep abreast of what is going on in the developments so we should have the final numbers for us for next year by the next meeting. obviously i will get it before then and i will let you know. but in terms of you know the report. we will know next month for sure. >> but i have my fingers crossed. >> okay. >> anything else on that? >> no. >> item for future meetings? >> well, this is not exactly an item for a future meeting, it is an item for this evening but it effects our future meetings and that is that commissioner jamie studley will be leaving us and tonight is her last meeting. because as she had informed us earlier she will not be here for the july meeting and then we have made a decision to

cancel the august meeting because of the number of us will be traveling or out of town. so tonight, is her last evening, as a commissioner on the ethics commission and fairly memorable one at that. >> and i am sure. >> you will be missed greatly. >> i will miss everyone on the commission and the commission staff a great deal. >> but in the as much as we will miss you. >> and it is just it has been a rare pleasure and a rare honor to work with you and have you not only a member but a marvelous chair. and you know, i think that you have been a great leader and just so wise, wise and underline wise because you have this body of knowledge and this acute level of inquiry and insight in things and you have tried so hard to be thoughtful

and fair and succeeded, well succeeded. and you bring to it also, not only thoughtfulness, but compassion which is so important and truly an academic and i have learned so much from you and it feels wonderful to know at my age i have people around that are mentors and also friends and it just means the world that you have been here. >> and we will miss you. i can guarantee. >> it is a truly a pleasure of serving with you and you helped me and your advice and counsel have been invaluable throughout my experience here and i echo comments about your wisdom being a huge asset on this commission and i also add that

your leadership ability to build consensus which things are breaking down, the 100 percent effort that you gave each meeting and in struggling with issues that may have felt either mundane or difficult, it is truly admirable and you will very much be missed on this commission and i appreciated getting a chance to know you. >> thank you. >> just tell me when it is my turn i will be brief. >> the one person who does not need to be brief. >> i am a complete sucker for the opportunity to serve and i care so very, very much about government meeting the highest expectations that we set for it.

and so let me start by talking about the staff. one thing that i think that we have in common even the newest commissioner can see it that this is not an easy responsibility and we do it in a fish bowl with very high standards and some extreme difficulties and i have been just tremendously impressed by the way that the staff led by jack and mable but all of the people that i have dealt with on the staff have soldiered on to do right and to carry out their sworn responsibilities as representatives of the city and county of san francisco against some very, formittable criticism, and to up hold the expectations about open and responsible government. and i know that it has been

hard. although, it will appear on the record that i am departing before the end of my term. i have heard that 6 months and three months. and who is counting. and holding on by one fingernail to do that some days. but it is an honor, san francisco asks a lot of our public officials. and we ask a lot of ourselves as a city and these are incredible standards that we are asked to try to carry out, to be ethical and open and at the same time, careful and accurate and respect privacy, tonight's conversation could not capture it, better. and as we are trying to balance all of those things, knowing what the voters have put in place and what they have asked and what individuals expect of the way that their government deals with them. and so, i am very touched by

what you said that jack and dev and ben, we all take it very seriously and i have been privileged to work with all of you and i am sorry that we will not have more of a chance to work together. and as i said as i think about emie and susan herriman and ilean hansen. >> and dorothy. i have learned that it is so remarkable to create this strange situation in which we can't talk to each other outside and we try to be wise to use your word and just coming together once a month to do in public what people in other processes get to debate

in private and yet somehow we have done it respectfully and thoughtfully and everybody on the commission has been really committed to these values each when we disagreed about particular items i have felt a sense of good faith. so 6 years ago, 6 years and 3 months ago i didn't and five months. i don't think that i know how much time it will take, and i did speak about the billing was not quite accurate but i am glad to have served and i wish you all of the best and happy to help any of you or this who process going forward if i can. but, the time has come to let somebody else have this chance, and i just want to thank all of you and jack, i feel the same way that i have learned a great deal from working with you and everybody involved with the commission.

so, thank you. >> thank you. >> i think that we created the plaques. >> is that the upgrade? >> look at that. shiny elegant. >> and it is smaller. >> every time that i ored one of these i have had to use a different company. so none of them are the same any more. >> you are very cool. >> we used to have, we used to have for years we had paper nameplates and commissioner hansen said that everybody else has real name plates and the question is are these available to us as souvenirs? >> we will mention your name, and but you never know what other commission i could recycle it and save the taxpayers. >> thank you very much and i will treasure the experience. >> and finally, public comment, any further public comment? >> since we still have a member of the public? joining us?

>> all right. well, with that, this meeting... >> i move to adjourn. >> second. >> okay. >> good morning today is june 28th, and what a fine morning

it is, this is the local agency formation, of the city of san francisco, and we would like to thank my colleagues for being here, my name is john avalos i am the chair and to my right is david camp os and london breed and across the aisle is eric marr. madam clerk, could you call the next item? >> call the roll, or the commissioners who are absent, or some are on the way and we will excuse those who are not here later on the agenda. and if you could call the next item. >> approval of at proval from the april, 26th, 2013, regular meeting. >> colleagues any comments or questions on the minutes? >> okay. we can go on to public comment.

on the minutes? we will close public comment. and colleagues could we get a motion to approve the minutes? >> so moved. >> the question from commissioner campos and seconded by breed and we will take that without objection. >> item three, authorizing the agreement and june 30, 2014. we have a presentation from jason freed. >> jason freed's office staff, which is now what is becoming the annual update to the contract that we have with our legal services/interrum director, to continue the contract and it is expiring at the end of the month and the staff is recommending to continue it one more year, if at any point in time, the commission wishes to terminate the contract. they do wish to terminate the contract whatsoever, as long as

we give miss mill and her her law firm notice of that transaction occurring. we are no ways bound for the entire year. and we will see that we recommend $95,000 and i will use the same formula that we used last year for the contract, but, we don't spend nearly that amount of money, so if that was the desire to lower that amount of money it would be done as well. >> what we actually spent on the contract? >> sure. for, i did look those numbers up, for the fiscal year, 2011, we spill, 116,000. >> last year, we have the full fiscal year, is $75,976 and this year we are coming in at 75,000 and we spent about 63 through the end of may and we have one more month to go and if you average it out it will come to 75,000 by the time this

year is over. >> if we lower to 75. >> this year we will be 5,000 below that 75 and we should be fine with that, and i notice that there are other items on the agenda. >> and we only use the services as we need it and it is as-needed services if we are getting close to, you know, a high amount that we could usually just cut back on the hours that we asked her to utilize for us. so you could very easily fit within 75. >> okay. >> and well, i would like to do that, but if we were to actually do, lower that contracted amount to 75, and to reflect what traditionally we spent, where does that portion of that, where we are lowering from? that stays? the over all budget? >> mo